Lingen against Souroy
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1795 |
| Date | 01 January 1795 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 88 E.R. 615
COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
Referred to, Crabtree v. Bramble, 1747, 3 Atk. 688; Thynne v. Earl Glengall, 1848, 2 H. L. C. 154.
case 28. linuen against souroy. [Referred to, Crabtree v. Bramble, 1747, 3 Atk. 688; Thynne v. Eml Glengall, 1848, 2 H. L. C. 154.] If a man by marriage-articles agree to invest a certain sum of money in land to the use of his wife, and devise land to his nephews without having made the investment, the land ahall pass to the wife in pursuance of the agreement.-S. C. 2 Eq. Abr. 327. S. C. Gilb. Eq. Rep. 91. S. C. 1 Peer. Wms. 172. A man marries a wife worth seven hundred pounds, and binds himself by marriage-articles to invest fourteen hundred pounds in land to such and such uses, viz. to himself for life, remainder to the heirs of their bodies begotten, the remainder to his right heirs. The husband dies, the marriage-articles unperformed, and by his will devises a house, value fifteen pounds a-year, to the wife, and ninety pounds a-year to his nephews, having no children; then comes the clause in his will, "and all my other lands in York, or any other part of Great Britain, I leave to my nephews." The question was, whether the fourteen hundred pounds, though not actually invested in land, ahould, notwithstanding, in equity, be deemed land, so as to pass by (a) See Simmonds v. Parminler, 1 Wils. 185, and Beck v. Robley, H. Bl. Rep. 89, nolis. (b) See 2 Burr, 1086, and the case of Harris v. Benson, 2 Stra. 910. Auriol v. Thomas, 2 Term Rep. 52. 616 MICHAELMAS TERM, 10 QUEEN ANNE. IN B. B. 10 MOD. 39. the word " land " in the will, saving to the wife her interest for life ? or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moore v Petchell
...the service of the writ was itself equivalent to notice, it plainly shewing that the Plaintiff required payment. He cited Rmnball v. Ball (10 Mod. 38); Frampton v. C'oulaon (1 Serjeant Wilson's Eep. 33); Waters v. Earl Tho.net (2 Q. B. Rep. 757); Baillie v. Edwards (2 H. Ld. Ca. 74). the ma......
-
Buckler against Moor
...of performance is not necessary on a covenant to pay a penalty on default.- 7 Co. 28. 1 Saund. 33. Cro. Eliz. 383. 2 Danv. 100, pi. 4. 10 Mod. 38, 396. 12 Mod. 413. Uougl. 483. An action was brought upon a charter-party ; and Hale, Chief Justice, in that case said, that upon a penalty you n......
-
Mallam v Arden and Others
...quarterly. The distress was a legal demand, as an action is the legal demand on a promissory note after it becomes due : Bumball v. Ball (10 Mod. 38). tindal C. J. According to the evidence, the Defendant seems to have made her election as to the period of payment. It would be unreasonable ......
-
Norton v Ellam
...of its being made payable with interest, as it shews that the parties intended some time to elapse before a demand. In Rmnhtll v. Ball (10 Mod. 38), it was certainly held that in debt on a note pay-[462]-able on demand, it is not necessary to allege a demand in the declaration ; because the......